User talk:Auron/Archive 2
This is an archive of my talk page, from June 5th, 2007 to July 20th, 2007. Please don't edit it; leave comments and messages on my talk page. Image: Cheese.jpg Hey, saw your post on my page, left one there too, just wanted to know if i should re-load my picture, or just move the page to image:cheese slaya's sig. thanks :D— [[User:Cheese Slaya|'Cheese Slaya']] (Talk) 07:19, 5 June 2007 (CEST) :since the pic is deleted, im guessing you want me to re-load it :D— [[User:Cheese Slaya|'Cheese Slaya']] (Talk) 07:19, 5 June 2007 (CEST) ::Alright, it's fixed, thx auron. BTW triple posting FTW! :D— [[User:Cheese Slaya|'Cheese Slaya']] (Talk) 07:22, 5 June 2007 (CEST) :::/agree -Auron 08:00, 5 June 2007 (CEST) W/any Shouting Warrior Thank you for adjusting my build and fixed some typo's i'm thankfull Tomoko 18:03, 5 June 2007 (CEST) Uh... So, what happened to our policies >.> -- Armond Warblade 18:37, 5 June 2007 (CEST) :Read up on the forums. -Auron 01:19, 6 June 2007 (CEST) ::Where? -- Armond Warblade 05:09, 6 June 2007 (CEST) :::The admin section, have you registered? -Auron 05:27, 6 June 2007 (CEST) ::::There it is, forgot to tell it to remember my login. -- Armond Warblade 01:14, 7 June 2007 (CEST) :::::So it's a secret? Or can the general public read it, too? --Hhhippo 01:59, 7 June 2007 (CEST) ::::::Only Admins can. You are not missing much though. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 02:07, 7 June 2007 (CEST) :::::::If you're interested, I'll paste it here. I just wanted to get a notice out to the admins, and that seemed like the best method. Anyone, at any time, can request private chat logs from me (or posts in the admin section), and I should fulfill the request. Exceptions exist, as always, but for the most part, I'm not hiding anything :) -Auron 09:25, 7 June 2007 (CEST) ::::::::Surreeee you aren't ;)... [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 09:51, 7 June 2007 (CEST) :::::::::Well, I don't really want to read all of your chatting, but it would be interesting what's the current status with the policies and why Tanaric suddenly wanted them wiped, not just the attribution fixed. So if you could paste that part here, that would be nice. --Hhhippo 14:04, 9 June 2007 (CEST) There's no difference between the two tbh. If they're copyright violations, we can get sued/shut down over them (if they exist). By deleting them, I safeguarded us in the short term. Yes, the information is still there. We've still got a little bit of work to do before we can bring them back (or write new ones). I can give you a status update as of a day or two ago, I haven't been up to snuff on what we've done to remedy it. Here is the post I made concerning the topic. -Auron 15:56, 9 June 2007 (CEST) :I see, thank you. So I assume someone will import them from the Gwiki dump, and we don't need to think about re-writing them yet. What about other pages that Tanaric didn't find? I guess there might be a problem e.g. at PvXwiki:No_personal_attacks, PvXwiki:Style_and_formatting and . And what about templates? --Hhhippo 19:59, 9 June 2007 (CEST) ::There might be, if the original author had a problem with our presentation of the derivative work. Seeing as said original authors haven't complained, we're in the clear on those. It might be prudent to ask them outright (not sure if Rainith or whoever keeps tabs on this wiki, probably not though) if they're fine with it. -Auron 09:26, 10 June 2007 (CEST) Can't We All Get Along I wrote something, and I hope you will read. CWAGA is a project started by me, and maintained by me today. Please share. Bluemilkman 19:12, 6 June 2007 (CEST) So tell me... So tell me...why does every build here have to start with Build: namespace if only builds are here? And why are all the builds transfered over?--Eloc Jcg :here and there are templates and policies and articles like build - [[User:Skakid9090|'Skakid9090']] 07:54, 24 June 2007 (EDT) ::Doesn't answer my first question.--Eloc Jcg :::there are templates and policies and articles like build - [[User:Skakid9090|'Skakid9090']] 16:57, 24 June 2007 (EDT) ::::Krowman has already addressed the problem my friend :). [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 16:59, 24 June 2007 (EDT) RfAs Because these candidates are people who might theoretically be working with us, next time you're on, would you mind reviewing the candidates and, in cases where it looks like the candidate has some support (i.e. the nomination could actually result in Sysoption), could you at least indicate some kind of opinion. Thanks. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 14:01, 25 June 2007 (EDT) Code Update Are the new sunspear and luxon/kurzick skills gonna be updated soon? Penguincontact 22:22, 27 June 2007 (EDT) :No idea. -Auron 22:39, 27 June 2007 (EDT) ::The code for that is not made on this site, we just use it. See here. --Hhhippo 22:46, 27 June 2007 (EDT) Thanks for the education. Was gearing up for a complain festival =P Penguincontact 01:30, 28 June 2007 (EDT) lolz i know its great but you have to wait for 5 votes ;) - [[User:Skakid9090|'Skakid9090']]º_o 12:44, 1 July 2007 (CEST) :...indeed, haha. -Auron 13:26, 1 July 2007 (CEST) heya hey auron! i haven't been on the wiki much lately, but i've seen u in-game. it seems that my only vetted build has dissapeared off the wiki =I'm trying to locate it but i can't seem to find it. could u help me out in your free time? [[User:AV|@v] :What was the name? -Auron 03:27, 2 July 2007 (CEST) :Nvm, I see it's been taken care of. -Auron 03:27, 2 July 2007 (CEST) Deletion!!!! or renaming, lol Thank you for deleting that build, that guy was a pain in the ass! Pfft I meant renaming it...I knew what i was talking about.....:)Metal enchantment 05:05, 2 July 2007 (CEST) Build:Team - HB Balanced Mend Aliment vs Dismiss Condition I prefer Mend Aliment in HB since most to all builds in HB are condition heavy. and I've also seen many of the top HB players use Mend Aliment over Dismiss Condition. Mgelo21 15:49, 2 July 2007 (CEST) Mend Ailment is standard in the HB Meta dude. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 22:18, 2 July 2007 (CEST) :Indeed. I merely thought that getting conditions off was a priority; I didn't know the meta was to keep them on you. I guess letting Deep Wound get covered is a popular deal. -Auron 23:15, 2 July 2007 (CEST) ::Most don't run DW. I for example run 2 Pack-hunters (R/P) and an EDA D/P. It is very simple for AI to just spam things such as Apply Poison/Poisonous Bite and Barbed spear or EDA. Also, Hero Ai has the tendency to be unable to differentiate between removing Deep Wound, and Bleeding (often removing random conditions such as Poison or Blind off your Ele). [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 23:22, 2 July 2007 (CEST) :::I just obs'd five matches, and every single one had a burst sin with twisting fangs. Don't gimme that "most don't run DW" crap :P -Auron 23:47, 2 July 2007 (CEST) ::::Meh, was talking about Heros. And they use Impale :P. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 23:49, 2 July 2007 (CEST) :::::Yeh, I run an assacaster in HB (more effective, more disruptive than a burst sin). A/Me with energy drain, augury of death etc - random knockdowns and tons of armor ignoring damage is frustrating for them monks :P -Auron 23:51, 2 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::Oh no...Build Wiki lives?! I better go dig up the Nazi userbox I had for you on Guild Wiki. --Hikari 07:05, 3 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::It had better say "HA Nazi" :P. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 07:25, 3 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::::Yah...that would be fitting, I recall being forced to run that accursed offensive spirit spammer in HA with him far too many times, I ask if I can change...Auron goes boom. Do you know what that build can do to your mind? 6712345 6712345 6712345...*sniff*--Hikari 20:05, 3 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::::...DSA.... [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 20:07, 3 July 2007 (CEST) Guys, guys, guys, guys? You ever played HB? I guess not. Lemme explain you why mend. Not since it's condition heavy, or whatever. But just 1 simple reason: Dismiss Condition is bugged. Heroes won't use it... Unexist 10:42, 12 July 2007 (CEST) I have played a little bit of HB. They use Dismiss; just not well :/ (They do not take advantage of its spammability at all). Heroes are better with Mend simply because they have the natural instinct to use it on the person with the most conditions (They ignore the more harmful conditions, such as Daze, Blind, and DW). [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 10:49, 12 July 2007 (CEST) :Yah HB is all about AI-abuse. — Skuld 12:57, 12 July 2007 (CEST) ::AI-Abuse > Manual control :). Unexist 15:32, 13 July 2007 (CEST) Rofl I think its time to upgrade your userpage auron, its getting boring. BaineTheBotter 05:01, 4 July 2007 (CEST) :Cough, i also think that CWAGA failed on this point somehow(no offense Blue). BaineTheBotter 05:02, 4 July 2007 (CEST) none taken Bluemilkman 08:49, 4 July 2007 (CEST) GW released in the 50's Your link to GW produces access denied. Try this. Btw: Nice catch ;-) – [[User:Hhhippo|'HHHIPPO']] ‹sysop› 01:11, 5 July 2007 (CEST) :I am not having that problem. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 01:17, 5 July 2007 (CEST) And guild wars will live on forever. I have a pic of saying it in 2023 :). Unexist 10:42, 12 July 2007 (CEST) Language Usage I KNOW I've seen admins on more than one occasion remove or * (stamp) obsenities and prophanity. I saw it during the sefre conversation and a few others. In this case, the usage of prophanity doesnt even serve a purpose, nore does it even have a propper context, is pointless, and I consider it offensive. It detracts from the site as a comunity for everybody. "Additionally, editors are strongly discouraged from using profanity in comments to other contributors. These examples are not inclusive. Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. When in doubt, comment on the article's content without referring to its contributor at all." -http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/GuildWiki:No_personal_attacks. It appears I have overstepped my bounds and taken a liberty in regards to a policy that we have, by proxy, adopted. Shireensysop 11:39, 6 July 2007 (CEST) :Link me to those conversations so I can revert them please. — Skuld 11:40, 6 July 2007 (CEST) ::And Skuld will have my support. Strongly discouraged =/= required. -Auron 11:51, 6 July 2007 (CEST) Rodger, I understand. I will, however, leave a polight note, such as this, on the user page of anyone I see using obsene or pointless profanity with the above link and a polight request to not use it, for each incident. That will be my action to Strongly Discourage this behavior. Point taken. Shireensysop 11:54, 6 July 2007 (CEST) :Fair enough, you are perfectly in your rights to express your concern and politely request that people refrain from swearing. -Auron 12:05, 6 July 2007 (CEST) Quote I was trying to find for you. I found the quote and the link I was trying to find for you the other day... "This responsibility (, of an admin,) manifests itself both in the practical powers granted to Administrators, Deletion, Rollback, and Banning, as well as the more general Administrative role of attempting to ensure a high level of professionalism on the Wiki, while also attempting to make the Wiki as user friendly as possible." -PvXwiki:Administrators Shireensysop 09:55, 8 August 2007 (CEST) MSN- Shireen Preferably tomorrow. We need to talk, all together. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 02:33, 9 July 2007 (CEST) :I thought you were busy moving. -Auron 04:06, 9 July 2007 (CEST) ::7 1/2 hours outside cleaning the damn porch...much fun. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 04:21, 9 July 2007 (CEST) :::I'm on msn now, dunno where ya'll are. -Auron 04:40, 9 July 2007 (CEST) :::: :/... ---> :) <--- [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 04:48, 9 July 2007 (CEST) :::::Heh, he deleted them before the dicussion even began :/. Lack of self-confidence perhaps? [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 08:05, 9 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::Uh... what? The whammo build? -Auron 09:21, 9 July 2007 (CEST) Featured PvE Build I was wondering that since Build:Any/D Generic Forge Runner has been vetted, if you can put my build Build:E/Mo Hard Mode Kirin Farmer as the featured PvE build? I don't know if I'm wrong here, but I can't put it there myself as the featured builds are shown on the main page >.< --Teh Uber Pwnzer 12:11, 9 July 2007 (CEST) :Done. -Auron 13:36, 9 July 2007 (CEST) ::Thanks.--Teh Uber Pwnzer 04:59, 10 July 2007 (CEST) Hallo I get the feeling you PvP a good bit. Just GvG? Any HA? My old guild, we used to HA quite a bit back during last summer. Kind of stopped once it became extremely difficult to counter the gimmick builds out there. Now we're "PvE nubs" per se, and stick to doing less stressful things such as The Deep and what-not. --Talonz 10:40, 13 July 2007 (CEST) :No Auron is teh sux. Ask anyone ;). [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 18:48, 13 July 2007 (CEST) :Yea, I'm a PvPer. I do GvG primarily, with PvE in the downtime. HA is abysmally bad atm, anet fucked it up hardcore and has refused to fix it. I'm stuck at r7, but I'm not about to grind 2000 more fame to tiger under the current sucky conditions of HA. -Auron 00:33, 14 July 2007 (CEST) Reaper's Mark Vote I want my vote back asap. I don't care if 10 seconds is long or not for you. I shouldn't even explain more but i'll do anyway. Conjure Phantasm is 5 sec recharge skills with same degen and near duration. Reaper is elite too. I'm not talking about wich of the 2 is better, but for pressure (that is what that build lacks of) sure reaper isn't the best choice. (Not even talking about the two long casting-20 sec recharge skills (that were the core of my critics)). Stop. Waiting for my vote Sjeps 22:42, 13 July 2007 (CEST) :Till waiting. Now RM recharge time is 15 sec. Should i wait it becomes one minute to get my vote back? Sjeps 13:35, 18 July 2007 (CEST) ::Wow, I didn't even notice this section. Put new comments at the bottom of the page next time so I'll notice sooner please :P ::Your comment was "Nice anti-melee build, but not much pressure. Long recharging hexes don't allow many targets." ::That's pretty much entirely wrong, except for the "nice anti-melee" part. The pressure is 8 degen under a fat, spammable hex stack (reapers -> fainthearted -> parasitic, easily maintainable on 2-3 targets - no other hex builds come *close* to that kind of pressure). I always ran that build with a 20/20 hct/hsr curses wand/offhand, which made the recharge on those powerful hexes no concern. You compare it to phantasm, but phantasm is just crap (sure its spammable, but it doesn't *do* anything; and 10 energy for a cover hex is a waste). The only long-recharging skills are reckless haste and price of failure, but that rarely matters; once you've thrown reckless and price on and covered them with parasitic, the hex stack ain't coming off (every hex-heavy team build has monk shutdown to prevent too many hexes from being removed). ::Basically, the Reaper's Mark is the best Necromancer build in existance atm, and easily the one that sees most use. Some teams sub out Reaper's for Corrupt Enchantment (more degen at the cost of energy management), but the build is the same. I'm not going to try and make you like it, but I am going to point out that no better build exists. ::-Auron 14:07, 18 July 2007 (CEST) ::Addendum; Yes, conjure phantasm/nightmare mesmers can produce 10 degen on a target, albeit with unimaginable energy problems. No, those mesmers don't do anything, nor are they ever a threat. Phantasm and Nightmare are simply bad skills. All of the necro hexes that cause degen have a secondary (usually devastating) effect; the mesmer ones don't. The whole mesmer argument is moot though, as they are terrible at melee shutdown. -Auron 14:13, 18 July 2007 (CEST) :::Sry for putting on top, i'm not used. What i am just saying is that you CAN'T strike a vote only because you don't agree. I did gave "meaningful reason", that is the only thing vote needs to stay. Talking about the build itself RM is now 15 sec recharge (12 before) that really doesn't make it "spammable" (your wording). What i am saying (and this is why i gave the build 3 (that isn't even low imho)) is that this build is useful against melee, but does only that. The pressure is LOW and the healers will not be hurted by you. A -5 degen every 15 seconds is about 150 damage every 15 seconds. A sword warrior simply swinging will do more than 380 damage every 15 seconds. Let's say you can hex 2 targets same time (15 recharge 30 duration (ignoring cast time and aftercast)). 150*2=300 that's still < 380. About "unimaginable energy problems" of more pressuring builds just check one humble example of trash Build:N/Me IX Degen that can put some pressure without having energy problems (anyway i think (i hope) you already watched it since i got your vote). Sjeps 16:03, 18 July 2007 (CEST) Guild User:Bluemilkman/Pvxguild Can you look at this for me? Thanks. Bluemilkman 15:56, 14 July 2007 (CEST) :Have fun with that. -Auron 03:15, 15 July 2007 (CEST) Build Deletion Hi I was wondering if you could look over the build deletion for Build:D/any Balthazar's Eternal, it's up for deletion against a Wild Blow Balthazar Dervish which only has Mystic Sweep and Avatar of Balthazar in common. I really don't think it is an equal match to my build nor that mine should be deleted for something not even relatable to it. --Third 16:34, 14 July 2007 (CEST) :Done. -Auron 03:15, 15 July 2007 (CEST) Hey Dude Hey Dude, You still in Tigers? I'm still stuck in aB, but funny thing was I wanted to join aB a year ago, so I guess I'm happy here. Too bad we're not GvGing right now. Hopefully once GWEN hits, we'll be able to. Take it easy, see you online. Chewbacca Defence 16:40, 17 July 2007 (CEST) :Welcome back :) — Skuld 19:54, 17 July 2007 (CEST) ::Nah, Tigers... fizzled out. Dan/Armen went (back?) to WoW, Ross joined SCC then deadly core... I haven't heard from any of the others. I see squid occasionally in RA, but we don't spend lots of time talking. -Auron 04:12, 18 July 2007 (CEST) alleged Fastway rating sock puppets Could you take a look at the ratings on the aforementioned build page? 5 of them (Flon, Duch127, C, Crusheer, and Ruiz) are believed to be sock puppets of a certain Taan, who created the build. 4 of these alleged sock puppets have nothing on their contributions page, and have voted on nothing else (to the best of my knowledge). the fifth, Crusheer, has only edited his own user page and Taan's. note that the first edit on crusheer's user page is by taan, noting that he is a luxon, likeley to back crusheer's rating note that he "saw it in ab". I am not alone in the worry that the ratings in question were sock-puppeted, and would ask that you either delete the said ratings or something to that effect. maybe create a policy or something pertaining to sock-puppets? thanks in advance, ~ ZamaneeJinn 04:43, 18 July 2007 (CEST) Well Taan is my friend and we played this together, so he asked me if i could rate it for him. Delete my rate if u find it wise :) --Crusheer 11:00, 18 July 2007 (CEST) :I find that highly unlikely, crusheer. You're a self-proclaimed luxon, and he a kurzick. you would have to be in his kurzick guild to have run it. furthermore, while you say here that you tested it with him, you stated it in your rating that you "saw it" as opposed to testing it. however, if this is true, then you would not mind giving us both your in game name and taan's. --ZamaneeJinn 19:49, 18 July 2007 (CEST) :: :) OK guys, nevermind. i deleted my sockpuppet vote...sry for that anyways --Crusheer 20:44, 18 July 2007 (CEST) :::LAWYERED!!!! ~ ZamaneeJinn 20:47, 18 July 2007 (CEST) :::: xD lolz, my ingame name is Lord Crusheer, why do u wanna know? --Crusheer 21:54, 18 July 2007 (CEST) :::::I wanted u to give in game name for both you and Taan, so i could see if you and taan were on the same or different accounts. It's sort of a kill question for sock-puppeteers :) ~ ZamaneeJinn 23:16, 18 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::What about i have 2 accounts? :P Or what if Taan have 2 accounts :D --Crusheer 00:25, 20 July 2007 (CEST) Sign in I can't. Why not? 70.130.244.222 05:14, 18 July 2007 (CEST) :No idea. Wrong password? -Auron 05:32, 18 July 2007 (CEST) Pack Hunter Where? SoH is also teh sux, unless your mes :P. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 01:27, 19 July 2007 (CEST) U r guild-hopper :) [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 18:13, 19 July 2007 (CEST) Unfair vote An author of a build has just pointed out 3 unfair and invalid 0-0-0 votes. I'll post more info in a sec. ~~ [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] ^_^ (talk)· 03:02, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :...then why did you press "save page..." -Auron 03:03, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::Because I wanted you to see this, and I needed to fetch the info. ::Build is Build:A/D Critical Reaper by Reason.decrystallized. Neither me or Skakid are impressed by the poor voting. ~~ [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] ^_^ (talk)· 03:04, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::Both are meh. Sins have better things to do than wield scythes. :::In regards to the voting... well, I'd have to agree with Sir On The Edge. Think of it this way; if two people submitted A/W sword builds, and they both had totally different sword attacks, you would say "omfg copy!" simply because they were both swording sins. Same goes for these builds. Even if they don't have exactly the same skillbar, they have the same elite and the same purpose. -Auron 03:10, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::Not really. They have only ONE identical skill. How can THAT be called similar? ONE skill the same, and uses the same weapon. Okay, let's delete every single warrior build because they are all the bloody same then, they use pretty much the same skills and the same weapons. ~~ [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] ^_^ (talk)· 03:12, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::Stop overreacting. Warrior bars use not only three different weapons, but a multitude of different elites (for each weapon!). These builds not only use the same weapon, but the same elite. That's a horrible comparison. -Auron 03:17, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::hehehe - [[User:Skakid9090|'Skakid9090']] 03:18, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::Big deal, so all SoR monks should be deleted? They use the same weapon, same attribute, same elite. ~~ [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] ^_^ (talk)· 03:19, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::::And yet have all manner of different utility skills, and thus are played different. Some are bonders, some are general prot; this assassin build just autoattacks. That's all it can do. It has zero utility, making it a thousand times more shitty than a primary dervish or a sin using daggers. The two builds have the same playstyle. -Auron 03:24, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::::And yet different builds. ~~ [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] ^_^ (talk)· 03:25, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::::::No, they are not different builds. If build A does X job, and build B also does X job (using the same elite and weapon), they are the same. Remember that builds are made to complete a job, not "just cuz." -Auron 03:27, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::::::Let's see... One has Critical Agility, Critical Eye and Critical Defences, while using 3 different scythe attacks to strike multiple foes and gain health, while the other uses some assassin skills to inflict conditions and uses those conditions to gain health, while having a far higher probability of taking damage, and is therefore not survivable. I'd call that different. ~~ [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] ^_^ (talk)· 03:29, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::::::It may be a bit presumptuous of me to butt in since i wrote the build, but i have played both and the playstyle is different. yeah, you're still hitting things with your magic stick, but with the Critical Reaper build you have an attack chain that lands three hits in about a second, and I've seen it top 400 dmg. it's a fast-recharging spiker, or at least intended to be. Disciple really was just a modified auto-attacker. er, not that I'm biased ...--Reason.decrystallized 03:35, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::::::::So... one attacks fast and the other doesn't? :/ -Auron 03:40, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::::::::What, using different skills to nearly double the attack speed doesn't qualify as being different? A spiker and a pressure aren't different things? Like I said, the idea with the critical reaper is to spike--skill chain to create massive damage in a short time so it's harder to deal with. I've seen lvl 20+ monsters go from full health to dead in under four seconds. That's as fast and hard a spike as the BoA sin, albeit not armor-ignoring. The Disciple of Death, on the other hand, had to auto-attack because of the long recharge on its skills and only limited ability to remove self-inflicted weakness. All it did--all that it COULD do--was to hit the spacebar, sit back, and occasionally reapply its conditions. Anyone who did that with this build, however, would be missing all of the point, and most of the damage. That, to me, is why they are different. Anyway, that's what I think. Do what you want with it.--Reason.decrystallized 04:01, 20 July 2007 (CEST) Napalm, you're ignoring the whole part about purpose. The entire point of both builds is to autoattack, which is shit tbh; I don't give a damn what specific skills they use, if they are both doing the same job, they are not separate builds. Remember what I said about the Warrior builds and the SoR builds you brought up? Even two cripslash builds, one with S&MS and the other with Bulls Strike, are different builds, because they don't do the same job. An SoR bonder and a SoR general prot do different things, and thus are different builds. -Auron 03:36, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :He just frickin well said it! One is for spiking by letting off a fast attack chain within a couple of seconds for high damage, the other is just pathetic. ~~ [[User:Napalm Flame|'Napalm Flame']] ^_^ (talk)· 04:19, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::I'm sorry to say, but skills with activation times do not count as a "spike," and the two builds are still played the same. They both have attack skills that you activate on recharge and neither one has utility skills. -Auron 04:30, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::just out of curiosity, if 400 dmg in >~1 second isn't a "spike", what is? and i am actually asking how you define it.--Reason.decrystallized 04:41, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::one more question: are users allowed to vote on their own builds? I've seen people do it before, and I wondered what the actual policy is, if there is one. thank you for the time addressing this, though I remain in disagreement with your assessment.--Reason.decrystallized 04:45, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::400 damage in more than one second isn't much of a spike, and I'm wondering how you get the figure of 400 damage in less than 1 seconds(which I assume is what you meant). --[[User:Edru_viransu|'Edru viransu']]//[[User_talk:Edru_viransu|'QQ about me']] 04:47, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::You are vastly exaggerating the time on that spike, Reason. A single character activating three or four attack skills suffers from something we call "aftercast," which, apart from the graphical slow-down of skill activation (as stated by izzy), means that between each "1/2s activation" skill, you stop attacking for at least another 1/2 second. In general, the time it takes to activate several 1/2s attack skills in a row ends up being a little more than 1 second per additional skill. My idea of a spike is ~700 damage in less than one second. :::::And yeh, as long as the vote is as objective as possible, authors can vote on their builds. If someone submits a necro with life transfer and life siphon and gives it 5-5-5, I'll remove it, because that's just bias. But if you, as an author, can sit there and critique your own build, there is no reason to disallow you from voting on it. -Auron 04:49, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::The three skill chain with an IAS lands all three attacks within about 1 second. Victorious sweep hits, 3/4 activation for Mystic's becomes 1/2, ditto for Eremite's. So 1st hit-1/2 second later, 2nd hit, 1/2 second later, 3rd hit. gw:Aura of Holy Might is bugged, as we finally found out (see the most recent note, which was added by me, actually, doing research for this build, and the accompanying discussion on the talk page), so the damage gets multiplied through the roof, meaning that you can hit a squishy for about 130-140 per hit, so ~400 dmg in ~1 second, more if the sundering mod triggers, less if one of the hits doesn't critical.--Reason.decrystallized 05:09, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::Erm ... i take it you need multiple people for 700 dmg in 1 second... ? and, actually, I'm actually not exaggerating about the time. I took a stopwatch and ran the chain, along with one extra attack: from the time I queued victorious sweep to the time the extra attack hit was ~3.5 seconds. That's ~1.2 for Victorious, .5 each for Eremite's and Mystic, and ~1.2 for the extra attack. Tney don't have aftercast. If you don't believe me, test it yourself.--Reason.decrystallized 05:09, 20 July 2007 (CEST) ::::::::Nowai? I don't mess around with wannabe solospike builds, because they have zero utility, and thus are completely worthless to me. If a sin build has no snare, it us useless; too many good skills exist to ignore them all and make an autoattacking wannabe dervish. -Auron 05:22, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :::::::::what does 'nowai' mean? it's pve, though. you don't really need a bunch of snares. imo. and i think we're using the term "autoattacking" to mean two different things. also, i think we moved out of a discussion of whether it was a copy to whether it is any good, which is a completely different thing. anyway, i've said my piece, so i'll let it drop and get some sleep.--Reason.decrystallized 05:35, 20 July 2007 (CEST) There is a reason we have a PvX:Well tag and procedure. A 0.0 vote for a 'copy-cat' style build is NOT appropriate in any way. Rather, 0.0 is a vote necesarry for the worst of builds. In the event of a copy cat build, one needs to request or place a PvX:Well deletion tag on it, ask for an admin opinion and let it go from there. In appropriate voting should be struck (ballet stuffing on either side of the fence should be quickly remedied). The build has been placed back into testing. Shireensysop 05:16, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :Does it matter O.o? Both suck similarly imo. I am still waiting for the day people realize Monk Hammer Smiters suck... [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 05:59, 20 July 2007 (CEST) Im not ruling in favor or disfavor of the build it'self, Im looking at it from pure procedure to maintain impartiality. I don't know a single thing about sins (honestly) and it's outside of my vetting comfort zones. But those are two different builds, one is completely focused on the critical mechanic, the other is focused on the condition mechanic. Accoding to many conversations floating about, they constitude different builds. Even if they were copy cats, PvX:Well or Merge Candidate would still be in context as opposed to a several 0.0 Votes to have a build deleted. It's inapropriate and ignores the system we have established. Shireensysop 06:10, 20 July 2007 (CEST) We remove biased votes. End discussion. [[User:Readem|'Readem']] (''talk''* ) 06:12, 20 July 2007 (CEST) :Agreed with readem on that point... we don't remove 0-0-0 votes just because we don't like em. If they're obviously made in spite (u voted my build down so i'll vote ur build down), we can remove em, but all other votes should remain. -Auron 06:45, 20 July 2007 (CEST)